DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 01/17/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: page 5, lines 3-6, and page 12, last 2 lines – page 13, line 2, list:
“- a second step comprising the calculation of the positive real scalar:
HPHt = hn+1. PHt;
- a third step comprising the calculation of the positive real scalar:
D_inv=1/(1+HPHt) “
Both second and third steps calculating the positive real scalar, but with different symbols and formulars.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: “CRPA antenna” in line 1 should be “Controlled Radiated Pattern Antenna (CRPA)” and “GNSS” in line 2 should be “Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS)”. In addition, “M”, “B”, “Fe” and “P” should be defined; for example: “where M is an integer greater than or equal to 2”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities: “n” in line 4 should be defined. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informalities: “H”, “t” in line 4; and “K” in line 16 should be defined. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: “FPGA” should be “Field-Programmable Gate Array (FPGA)”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 12 is objected to because of the following informalities: “CRPA antenna” in line 2 should be “Controlled Radiated Pattern Antenna (CRPA)”, and “GNSS” in line 3 should be “Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS)”. In addition, M, B, Fe and P should be defined; for example: “where M is an integer greater than or equal to 2”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 2-6 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 2-6 recite "apt to" in claim 2, line 2, meaning “prone to” or “likely to” which does not clearly define the limitation of the invention. It is suggested to change “apt to” to “configured to” or “adapted to”.
Claims 2-6 recite the limitation "the M sub-sampled signals" in claim 2, lines 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 2-6 recite the limitation "the previous period B.Fe" in claim 2, line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 3-6 recite the limitation "the symmetric complex covariance matrix Pn" in claim 3, lines 3-4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 3-6 recite the limitation "the inverse of the cross-correlation matrix Rxx" in claim 3, lines 4-5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 3-6 recite the limitation "the corresponding M sub- sampled signals" in claim 3, lines 5-6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 4-6 recite the limitation "the complex vector" in claim 4, line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 4-6 recite the limitation "calculation of the complex vector: PHt = Pn .hn+1*, wherein hn+1 is the complex line vector" in claim 4, lines 3-5, but hn+1* is not defined.
Claims 4-6 recite the limitation "the complex line vector" in claim 4, line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 4-6 recite the limitation "the current sampling period" in claim 4, lines 6-7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 4-6 recite the limitation "the positive real scalar" in claim 4, lines 8-9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 4-6 recite the limitation "calculation of the positive real scalar: HPHt = hn+1 . PHt" in claim 4, lines 8-10, and "calculation of the positive real scalar: D_inv = 1 /( 1 + HPHt )" in claim 4, lines 11-13. Both calculating the positive real scalar but with different symbols and formulars.
Claims 4-6 recite the limitation "the registered gain vector" in claim 4, lines 14-15. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 4-6 recite the limitation "the registered covariance matrix" in claim 4, lines 17-18. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 4-6 recite the limitation "calculation of the registered covariance matrix, symmetric complex: Pn+1’ = Pn – K. PHt*" in claim 4, lines 17-19, but Pn+1’ and PHt* are not defined.
Claims 4-6 recite the limitation "the propagated covariance matrix" in claim 4, lines 20-21. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 5 recites the limitation "one of the components of the corresponding complex vector PHt" in claim 5, lines 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 6 recites the limitation "one of the components of the complex vector Pn+1. Hn+1* equal to the product of the propagated covariance matrix Pn+1 by the conjugate transpose of the complex line vector H" in claim 6, lines 2-5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 12 recites "apt to" in claim 12, line 19, meaning “prone to” or “likely to” which does not clearly define the limitation of the invention. It is suggested to change “apt to” to “configured to” or “adapted to”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1, 2 and 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grobert (US 2005/0228841 A1) in view of Ulmer (US 10,481,273 B2).
Regarding claim 1, Grobert (figures 1-A, 1-B, 1A-A and 1A-B) disclose an electronic part of the CRPA antenna (paragraph [0029]) of an anti-jamming device for a Global Positioning System (GPS) receiver (paragraphs [0023] and [0024]), comprising: M inputs configured to receive elementary signals in B frequency bands from an array antenna comprising M elementary antennas (paragraph [0029]); for each input and each frequency band, a bandpass filter bank (1 and 17) configured to decompose each elementary signal received by the input in the band at a frequency Fe, into P sub-bands for obtaining P sub-sampled signals at a frequency Fe/P (paragraph [0024]); a calculation component (19 and 21) configured to apply, in each sub-band in parallel, an anti-jamming processing at the frequency Fe/P to the sub-sampled signals coming from the M inputs, so as to obtain a cleaned sub-sampled signal, the calculation component comprising a single hardware component (19) for all sub-bands of all bands, operating at the frequency B.Fe; and B.P calculation layer (21) implementing an interative processing, each calculation layer operating at the frequency B.Fe and implementing an operation of the iterative processing or a delay operation, the calculation layer being condercutive from a layer 1 to a layer number B.P (paragraph [0026]); and a summation component (13, paragraph [0027]) configured to receive all the cleaned sub-sampled signals of the same frequency band and to form from the sub-sampled signals a resulting corresponding cleaned signal, at the frequency Fe (paragraphs [0023]-[0041]). Grobert discloses the receiver is the GPS receiver and does not explicitly disclose the receiver being a GNSS receiver. However, Ulmer discloses an electronic part of an anti-jamming device for GNSS receiver or GPS receiver (column 3, line 62 – column 4, line 22). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adapt teaching of Ulmer to the electronic part of Grobert for anti-jamming in GNSS receiver system.
Regarding claim 2, Grobert and Ulmer disclose the electronic part according to claim 1. In addition, Grobert disclose wherein the layer number 1 is apt to receive at each period B.Fe the M sub-sampled signals of the same sub-band and an iterative datum coming from the layer number B.P at the previous period B.Fe (paragraphs [0024]-[0041]).
Regarding claim 10, Grobert and Ulmer disclose the electronic part according to claim 1. In addition, Ulmer discloses processing circuit including processor for processing GNSS signal is an FPGA logic circuit. Therefore, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adapt the FPGA logic circuit of Ulmer to the calculation component of Grobert for better energy efficiency and flexibility.
Regarding claim 11, Grobert (figures 1-A, 1-B, 1A-A and 1A-B) disclose an anti-jamming device for a GPS receiver, comprising: a CRPA antenna (paragraphs [0023], [0024] and [0029]). Grobert discloses the receiver is the GPS receiver and does not explicitly disclose the receiver being a GNSS receiver. However, Ulmer discloses an anti-jamming device for GNSS receiver or GPS receiver (column 3, line 62 – column 4, line 22). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adapt teaching of Ulmer to the anti-jamming device of Grobert for anti-jamming in GNSS receiver system. In addition, Grobert in view of Ulmer disclose an electronic device according to claim 1 (see the rejection of claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 12, Grobert (figures 1-A, 1-B, 1A-A and 1A-B) disclose a method of signal processing by an electronic part of a CRPA antenna of an anti-jamming device for a Global Positioning System (GPS) receiver (paragraphs [0023],[0024] and [0029]), comprising the following steps: receiving on M inputs of elementary signals in B frequency bands from an array antenna comprising M elementary antennas (paragraph [0023] and [0029]); for each input and each frequency band, decomposing by a bank of band-pass filters (1 and 17), each elementary signal received by the input in the band at a frequency Fe, into P sub-bands for obtaining P sub-sampled signals at a frequency Fe/P (paragraph [0024]); applying, by a calculation component (19 and 21) in each sub-band in parallel, an anti-jamming processing at the frequency Fe/P to the sub-sampled signals coming from the M inputs, so as to obtain a cleaned sub-sampled signal, the calculation component having a single hardware component (19) for all sub-bands of all bands, operating at the frequency B.Fe; and B.P calculation layers (21) configured to implement an iterative processing, each calculation layer operating at the frequency B.Fe and being apt to implement an operation of the iterative processing or a delay operation, the calculation layers being consecutive from a layer number 1 to a layer number B.P (paragraph [0026]); and receiving by a summation component (13, paragraph [0027]) all the cleaned sub-sampled signals of the same frequency band and forming from the sub-sampled signals a resulting corresponding cleaned signal, at the frequency Fe (paragraphs [0023]-[0041]). Grobert discloses the receiver is the GPS receiver and does not explicitly disclose the receiver being a GNSS receiver. However, Ulmer discloses a method of signal processing by an electronic part of an anti-jamming device for GNSS receiver or GPS receiver (column 3, line 62 – column 4, line 22). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adapt the teaching of Ulmer to the method of Grobert for anti-jamming in GNSS receiver system.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grobert in view of Ulmer and further in view of Nohara et al. (US 20030103589 A1).
Regarding claim 7, Grobert and Ulmer disclose the electronic part according to claim 1 above. Grobert and Ulmer do not explicitly disclose wherein the bandpass filter banks are produced according to the polyphase filter technique. However, Nohara et al. disclose bandpass filter banks are produced according to the polyphase filter technique (paragraphs [0079]). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adapt the polyphase filter technique of Nohara et al. to the filter banks of Grobert and Ulmer for reducing computational cost and flexible channelization.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grobert in view of Ulmer and further in view of Pagnanelli (US 20190238152 A1)
Regarding claim 8, Grobert and Ulmer disclose the electronic part according to claim 1 above. Grobert and Ulmer do not explicitly disclose wherein the summation component comprises an interpolator summing filter adding the cleaned sub- sampled signals. However, Pagnanelli (figures 10C and 12) discloses a summation component (bandpass interpolation filter 145B) comprises an interpolator summing filter (paragraph [0117]). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adapt the interpolator summing filter of Pagnanelli to the summation component of Grobert and Ulmer for reducing computational complexity and minimizing hardware requirements.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grobert in view of Ulmer and Pagnanelli and further in view of Nohara et al.
Regarding claim 9, Grobert, Ulmer and Pagnanelli disclose the electronic part according to claim 8 above. Grobert, Ulmer and Pagnanelli do not explicitly disclose wherein the interpolator summing filter is implemented according to a polyphase filter technique. However, Nohara et al. disclose bandpass filter banks are produced according to the polyphase filter technique (paragraphs [0079]). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adapt the polyphase filter technique of Nohara et al. to the interpolator summing filter of Grobert, Ulmer and Pagnanelli for reducing computational cost and flexible channelization.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-6 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding claims 3-6, Grobert and Ulmer disclose the electronic part according to claim 2. However, Grobert and Ulmer fail to further disclose the electronic part above wherein said iterative processing is the recursive least squares method; said iterative datum is the symmetric complex covariance matrix Pn of dimensions M x M, corresponding to the inverse of the cross-correlation matrix Rxx of the corresponding M sub-sampled signals.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Chopard et al. (US 8,818,435 B2) disclose system for receiving satellite signals jammed by at least one source of interference and by a thermal noise comprising means for receiving the said satellite signals, means for filtering the said satellite signals, in order to remove the disruption from the said sources of interference; first means for determining a first covariance matrix of the satellite signals, adding means for adding respectively a first coefficient to at least one element of the diagonal of the said first covariance matrix in order to obtain a second covariance matrix; second means for determining, on the basis of the said second covariance matrix, second coefficients used by the said filtering means; means for detecting a first power of the said thermal noise; and third means for dynamic determination of the value of the said first coefficients, on the basis of the first power.
Petersen (US 9,612,242 B2) teaches a carrier phase correction sub-system for use with a GNSS receiver that utilizes an active null and beam steering controlled radiation pattern antenna (CRPA) determines carrier phase corrections that compensate for antenna phase center movements in the carrier phase measurements taken from the CRPA filtered signal.
Clark (US 11,561,307 B2) discloses a system for identifying spoofed navigation signals includes a multi-element antenna configured to receive a plurality of navigation signals; the system also includes at least one processor configured to determine an angle of arrival for each of the navigation signals and analyze the angles of arrival for the navigation signals to determine whether one or more of the navigation signals are spoofed.
Kaplan (US 11,796,683 B2) teaches a phased array anti-jamming device, comprising a plurality (N) of antennas and a plurality of splitters connected to the antennas and adapted to split an RF stream received from the antennas; the phased array anti-jamming device further includes at least one digital signal processor adapted to digitally analyze a digital output of digital processing channels and to split the output into a plurality of digital down converted representations of respective analog outputs of a plurality of analog digital processing channels in a plurality of different frequencies and calculate at least one instructions selected from phase shift, amplification, and attenuation instructions for each one of the plurality of antennas per each one of the plurality of different frequencies; the phased array anti-jamming device further includes a plurality of phase shifter groups a plurality of group combiners and a main combiner adapted to sum outputs of the plurality of group combiners.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to QUOCHIEN B VUONG whose telephone number is (571)272-7902. The examiner can normally be reached 10:00-06:00PM M-F.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, ANTHONY ADDY can be reached at 571-272-7795. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/QUOCHIEN B VUONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2645
Prosecution Insights